Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 03/13/2023ANNOTATED AGENDA TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner RE: Planning Commission Meeting for Monday, March 13, 2023 _______________________________________________________________________________ Monday, March 13, 2023 7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE- ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Move to approve the agenda. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2023. MOTION: Move to approve the Planning Commission minutes dated February 13, 2023. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 6245 DUCK LAKE RD BUILDING MOVE (2022-20) Request for: • Building Move to relocate an existing detached garage from 17117 62nd St W to 6245 Duck Lake Rd MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing. MOTION 2: Move to approve request to relocate existing detached garage from 17117 62nd St. to 6245 Duck Lake Rd. as represented in the March 13, 2023 staff report. B. HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS (2022-16) Request for: • Site Plan Review on 2.99 acres MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing. MOTION 2: Move to recommend approval for a Site Plan Review on 2.99 acres as represented in the March 13, 2023 staff report and on plans dated February 21, 2023. ANNOTATED AGENDA March 13, 2023 Page 2 C. CODE AMENDMENT FOR A MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT Request for: • Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to the creation of a mixed use zoning district MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing. MOTION 2: Move to recommend approval of a code amendment to allow the creation of a mixed-use zoning district represented in the March 13, 2023 staff report. VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT VII. MEMBERS’ REPORT VIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Move to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, March 13, 2023 - 7:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr, Carole Mette, William Gooding, Rachel Markos, Robert Taylor, Daniel Grote, Frank Sherwood STAFF MEMBERS: Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner; Rod Rue, City Engineer; Matt Bourne, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -- ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA IV. MINUTES A. Approval of the Planning Commission Meeting minutes dated February 13, 2023. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 6245 DUCK LAKE RD BUILDING MOVE (2022-20) Request for: • Building Move to relocate an existing detached garage from 17117 62nd St W to 6245 Duck Lake Rd B. HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS (2022-16) Request for: • Site Plan Review on 2.99 acres C. CODE AMENDMENT FOR A MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT Request for: • Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to the creation of a mixed use zoning district VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT VII. MEMBERS’ REPORTS VIII. ADJOURNMENT UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2023 7:00 PM—CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Frank Sherwood, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr, Rachel Markos, Carole Mette, William Gooding, Robert Taylor, Dan Grote CITY STAFF: Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner; Rod Rue, City Engineer; Matt Bourne, Parks & Natural Resources Manager; Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Chair Pieper called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL Absent were commission members Markos, Grote and Gooding. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Taylor moved, seconded by Farr to approve the agenda. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. IV. MINUTES MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Sherwood to approve the minutes of December 12, 2022. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. BLUFFS AT NINE MILE CREEK SIGN VARIANCE Request for: • Variance to allow two (2) free standing signs in the RM-2.5 Zoning District Myrna Orenstein, of Imaginality Designs, displayed a PowerPoint and detailed the application. They propose an entrance monument at the Flying Cloud rive entrance on this 10-acre site. The building had 191 units built in 2003 with 15,000 feet of frontage along Flying Cloud Drive and 570 feet along Valley View PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 13, 2023 Page 2 Road with no signage. The existing sign at the corner of Valley View Road and Flying Cloud Drive faced one direction. What was needed was a doubled-face sign 700 feet along the road in one direction and 800 feet in other along Flying Cloud Drive. Orenstein displayed an overhead map of the site showing the difficulty in viewing the sign. She stated the setback was the challenge. She displayed the site constraints and explained the proposed sign position. The point was to ensure the sign guided visitors along a tight setback and a steep hill. The temporary sign would be taken down and the new sign placed between the easement and the private storm sewer. The size of the new sign would be kept within Code requirements. She displayed a rendering along the north face and explained the plan would include landscaping and lighting. Barnhart presented the staff report. The variance was requested due to the uniqueness of the property and could be supported by State Statute. The configuration of the site and topography seemed to support the need for additional wayfinding. A second sign would have no negative impacts to the neighborhood which was zoned office to the west and south. The proposed second sign reasonably approached Code and staff recommended approval of the application. Farr asked if there would be a requirement for the applicant to submit a revised landscaping plan, and Barnhart replied that would be the case if trees were to be removed. Farr asked if the site had the opportunity to have wall signs and Barnhart stated it did. Farr asked if an approval would restrict further such signs, and Barnhart stated the commission members could consider that possibility, but this was not a recommendation or a concern by staff. Farr asked for and received confirmation the corner sign at Valley View Road and Flying Cloud Drive was a permitted sign and asked if the new, nonconforming sign would become the primary sign in case the other sign was taken away. Barnhart replied the variance reflected the staff report, and he was not concerned about setting a precedent. The applicant could alter the plan in the future but would be allowed two signs. MOTION: Sherwood moved, seconded by Kirk to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. Mette stated she support this design and found it met the unique circumstances meriting a variance. She did not envision a precedent being set here. Kirk concurred, and added while he was sensitive to the proliferation of signs in Eden Prairie, this was not a concern in his opinion. Farr also agreed. He had brought up the issue of a possible precedent due to a condition in previous years in which a tall banner was temporarily used facing Highway 62. However, he found the sign’s design to be appropriate. Taylor stated he understood Farr’s concern, and asked if there were specifications or requirements for lighting. Barnhart replied he would check the Code but lighting could not create glare or light pollution on traffic or the sidewalks. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 13, 2023 Page 3 MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Mette to approve the Variance to allow a second free standing signs in the RM-2.5 Zoning District as requested in the February 13 2023 staff report. Motion carried 6-0. GUIDANCE RETAINING WALL VARIANCE Request for: • Variance to allow construction of a new retaining wall within the 75-foot shore impact zone Robert Guidarini, as 23-year resident of Eden Prairie, displayed a PowerPoint and explained he was requesting two variances, one to construct retaining walls within the city Code required 150-foot shoreline and one to construct hardcover improvements (retaining walls) reducing the hardcover calculation to 31 percent from the current calculated 32 percent, where 30 percent would be the maximum. This affected his single family house purchased in July 2013 with a timber retaining wall built in 1986. He displayed the site’s overhead location on Mitchell Lake. He stated the geosurvey determined the soil makeup was a high sand content making the removal of the existing wall for replacement impossible. Gravity walls were not an option. The timber wall was moving and bulging and separating at the joints, and needed immediate reinforcement. Guidarini displayed photographs of the walls that needed to be removed and added he would be reclaiming some of the land between the main wall and the water to restore some of the shoreline. Soil anchors would be used, and blocks with an approximate 12-inch depth. This required the removal of the lower garden walls which, again, increased the size of the shoreland. The final drawing was the result of numerous revisions and years of discussions with the Watershed District and the City. Also there would be planting of native species. This would result in a larger setback, reduction of impervious surfaces, restoration of some of the beach with native plants, and the return of stability to the home and the upper and lower decks. Taylor asked for and received confirmation there already was movement in the timbers. He suggested auguring in the piles. Kyle Heard, principal engineer at Geowall Designs, explained a number six rebar would be used, keeping the vibration to sand material to a minimum. Ground screws were an alternate option but this was more expensive. Farr asked for and received confirmation all the ground anchors were above the water table. He asked that the face texture of the materials have a natural look. Guidarini displayed images of the blocks to be used and stated they were the same as those used at the Wayzata Country Club. Farr commended the choice and added that staining was an option. He urged the applicant do everything possible PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 13, 2023 Page 4 to make the wall aesthetically pleasing. Guidarini added he could grow vines up the walls. Farr commended the attention to aesthetics. Mette asked for and received confirmation there would be one large wall with an improved aesthetic along with plantings. She asked if the additional space on the lower deck elevation was going to be soil and plantings or a railing. Guidarini replied the blue section in the drawing was compacted gravel between the two walls. There would be a railing along the wall with a possible vegetable garden on top. The main focus at this point has been \securing the house. Barnhart presented the staff report. This application was a good example of the reason for a variance process. The retaining walls were necessary to support the foundation of the house. The house was built before shoreland regulations and from staff’s view this was a unique situation. The property was a single-family home in a residential neighborhood, a reasonable use, and there were some visual impacts to the lake that could be mitigated by staining and plantings and other cosmetic/landscaping improvements. Staff recommended approval. Taylor asked if there was a possibility of other residents having the same issue, and Barnhart replied there were not many known homeowners in this predicament. Farr asked for and received clarification the small retaining walls were closer to the water before the timber wall. He surmised the previous owner had wished to have a beach and thus the shoreline was flattened. He asked for a clarification of the measurement of the shoreline. Barnhart replied there is some dispute as to the ordinary high water elevation, from which setbacks are measured. For that reason, staff did not specifically mention a minimum distance The whole property was in the Shore Setback, and the entire house is in the 0-75 Shore Impact Zone. Barnhart added staff recognized the beach was wider than allowed by Code so the applicant could introduce some landscaping and plantings, including at the southeast corner, to be approved by Engineering staff. Farr stated he did not have an issue with leaving the timber wall in place behind the block wall but was concerned about possible rot and voids 20 years from now. Rue replied that was possible but the soil anchors usually had a mesh before them and concrete to hold them in. Material would collapse into the gap and the timber could rot, but he did not envision the soil anchors moving. Heard replied the deterioration of timbers was due to water and oxygen. The backfill used was currently pea rock, the front side was clean stone, which would encapsulate and bury the timber wall to stabilize, or “petrify,” it. The shockcrete would be used at the bottom, but the fascia had oversized plates to hold a large section back into the hillside to compensate for deterioration in some sections. Farr added there were attached letters of support from neighbors and access for the project to the staff report. He asked what this access would be. Rue replied the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 13, 2023 Page 5 existing walls had been dismantled and rebuilt so his department asked for letters of permission, and the access would be coming down onto their own property from the northwest side. Guidarini replied a neighbor put a boulder wall in front of their timber wall as well and was kind enough to allow him to use the dirt excavated for this project as access. This was a part of a longtime discussion. Mette asked how the applicant worked with the DNR and the Watershed on this project. Barnhart replied Engineering staff worked closely with the applicant and the Watershed. Their comments would carry through the issuance of the building permit and the Watershed District also required permits for this project. MOTION: Taylor moved, seconded by Farr to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. Farr found this project to be a good solution and recommended a condition that the applicant should field stain the retaining wall to simulate a rock aesthetic. Mette found this application to be the only long-term, economically feasible solution to save this house. She agreed with Farr’s condition for the approval of this large facade but questioned how specific the commission should get regarding the motion. Kirk agreed but questioned the cost implication of the proposed condition. He commended the project and did not want to add an unknown cost, although the aesthetics were important. Farr agreed and stated there were two alternatives: to add a field stain or to order pre-colored concrete. Adding color to the concrete as it was being mixed was an alternative. Without either color or stain, the concrete would have a raw cement appearance. Taylor stated his background was working along the Mississippi River which had docks and retaining walls. Once a homeowner saw movement it would continue to deteriorate and he did not think there could be any delay in this project, which he supported. Mette thanked Farr for making the point about the raw concrete and suggested the applicant be required to work with staff on the aesthetics of the wall. Farr replied he would personally prioritize color over texture and wished to craft appropriate language in the motion. Discussion followed on crafting a specific motion. MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Mette to approve the variance of the application to allow a series of retaining walls within shoreline setback and to exceed the 30 percent limit hardcover within the shoreline overlay district as represented in the February 13, 2023 staff report with the additional requirement that the applicant work with staff to have appropriate visual aesthetics of the wall suitable to the local environment. Motion carried 6-0. PLANNERS’ REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 13, 2023 Page 6 MEMBERS’ REPORTS Farr stated he represented the commission to the City Council Workshop in January and passed along the gratitude of the City Council regarding the commission’s commitment to green goals and sustainability. VI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Taylor moved, seconded by Mette to adjourn. Motion carried 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sarah Strain, Planner II DATE: March 13, 2023 SUBJECT: 6245 Duck Lake Road Building Moving Permit APPLICANT/OWNER: Josh Hohn LOCATION: 6245 Duck Lake Road 60 DAY REVIEW PERIOD: April 15, 2023 REQUEST: • To move a building (3 stall garage) from 17117 62nd Street W to 6245 Duck Lake Road BACKGROUND The applicant applied for and received approval from the Planning Commission for this request in August 2021. The approval was valid for one (1) calendar year. The approval lapsed before the applicant was able to complete the request, prompting this new application. The Planning Commission, as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, conducts public hearings for building moving permits. The Planning Commission shall determine whether to authorize issuance or deny the building moving permit. The applicant, the owner of 6245 Duck Lake Road, also owns 17117 62nd Street W. Both properties are zoned R1-13.5 and are guided for Low Density Residential. The properties to the east and south are also zoned R1-13.5. Properties to the west are zoned R1-9.5. 17117 62nd Street W sits along the northern City boundary, and there are no properties in Eden Prairie north of the subject lots. All neighboring properties are guided for Low Density Residential. Along with the building moving permit application, the applicant has submitted an administrative lot line adjustment application to shift the common property line between 6245 Duck Lake Road and 17117 62nd Street W to the north approximately 67 feet, shown in red in the image to the right. As part of the lot line adjustment application, a portion of the existing driveway at 17117 62nd Street W will be removed to meet driveway setback requirements for the new lot line. This lot line adjustment application is currently being reviewed by City staff. 17117 62nd St W 6245 Duck Lake Rd Staff Report – 6245 Duck Lake Road Building Moving Permit March 13, 2023 Page 2 The intention of the proposed lot line adjustment is to increase the lot area of 6245 Duck Lake Road to be able to accommodate another accessory building on the site. City Code requires accessory buildings, including attached garages, to take up no more than seven and a half percent (7.5%) of the total lot area. The applicant is proposing to increase the lot area of 6245 Duck Lake Road to be able to move the existing three (3) stall garage located at 17117 62nd Street W, circled in yellow in the previous image, to 6245 Duck Lake Road. The proposed move would meet the accessory building coverage requirement upon completion of the administrative lot line adjustment. The only accessory building currently located at 6245 Duck Lake Road is the attached garage. One of the recommended conditions of approval for the building moving permit is the lot line adjustment application to be approved and recorded at Hennepin County prior to issuance of the building moving permit. EVALUATING BUILDING MOVING PERMITS Building moving permits are reviewed to ensure the structure can be safely moved, the move will be performed in a safe manner, and the moved building will not vary substantially from the surrounding properties. Below are the criteria the Planning Commission should use to consider the authorization of a building moving permit. 1. Structural Integrity of the Building to be Moved Buildings that are moved should be in good repair to not endanger people or property in Eden Prairie. The Building Inspector has assessed the structure proposed to be moved and has found the structure to be in good condition. The building is of sound construction to be able to be moved. Since the properties the building is moving between are adjacent to one another, the building move will not enter the public right-of-way. 2. Use of the Building to be Moved The structure proposed to be moved currently functions as a garage with no sewer or water connections. The proposed use of the structure at 6245 Duck Lake Road is a garage with no sewer or water connections. The proposed structure is fit for the proposed use on the new site. 3. Consistency with Zoning and Other City Codes City Code Chapter 10 requires the moved building to comply with City Code. The Building Department will ensure the garage is installed to building code standards at the new location. A detached garage is a permitted use in the R1-13.5 zoning district. Once the lot line adjustment is approved, 6245 Duck Lake Road will have enough lot area to accommodate an accessory structure of this size. Accessory structures can take up to seven and a half percent (7.5%) of the total lot area. The proposed location of the garage is yet to be determined. The location of the structure will need to be at least 10 feet from the side and rear lot lines to comply with City Code. This will be confirmed at the time of the building move. If this building moving permit is approved, it will leave 17117 62nd Street W without an enclosed parking stall. City Code requires at least one (1) enclosed parking stall per residential unit in all R1 zoning districts. To ensure both lots will be compliant with City Code after the proposed building move, it is recommended as a condition of approval that at minimum a single stall garage must receive building permits and begin construction at 17117 62nd Street W prior to the issuance of the building moving permit. Staff Report – 6245 Duck Lake Road Building Moving Permit March 13, 2023 Page 3 4. Neighborhood Character If moved, the building should not be out of character with the neighborhood to which it is moved. Comparative age, bulk, architectural style, and quality of construction of both the building to be moved and the buildings existing in the neighborhood shall be considered in determining whether a building is in substantial variance. If the building to be moved is more than ten (10) years older than the oldest building on the lands abutting the property to which the building is to be moved, such fact shall be evidence that the building to be moved is in substantial variance. The garage is part of the existing neighborhood character. The proposed building move would be less than 100 feet over a shared property line. The garage was built in 1981. The house at 17117 62nd Street W, where the garage is currently located and immediately north of the proposed location, was built in 1954. The houses across the street from 6245 Duck Lake Road, where the garage will be located, were built in 1985. The houses immediately south and east of 6245 Duck Lake Road were built in 2010. The structure to be moved will not be 10 years older than neighboring structures. The applicant is proposing to paint the garage to match the house, and the roofing of the house and the garage are already of similar color and material. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The authorization of this building moving permit is in harmony with intent and general purposes of the ordinance. The building is structurally sound, the use is permitted within the R1-13.5 zoning district, and the structure would not be out of character with the neighboring properties. Staff recommends authorization of the following request with conditions: 1. Authorize the issuance the Building Moving Permit (Project 2022-20) subject to plans dated July 12, 2021, based on the information outlined in the Planning Department Staff Report dated March 13, 2023 with the following conditions: a) The lot line adjustment application be approved and recorded at Hennepin County prior to issuance of the building moving permit. b) The location of the moved structure meets all accessory structure setback requirements applicable to the R1-13.5 zoning district. c) An enclosed parking stall measuring at least 10 feet by 20 feet receive building permit approval and begin construction at 17117 W 62nd Street prior to the issuance of the building moving permit. d) The building move take place within one (1) year of the Planning Commission authorizing approval of the Building Moving Permit. The Commission may choose from one of the following actions: 1. Authorize the issuance of the Building Moving Permit (Project 2022-20) as presented. 2. Authorize the issuance of the Building Moving Permit (Project 2022-20) with modifications. 3. Continue Building Moving Permit (Project 2022-20) for additional information. 4. Deny Building Moving Permit (Project 2022-20). Dear Eden Prairie Planning Commission, I appreciate your consideration for relocating the garage that current resides adjacent. My wife Stacey and I and our three children Paige, Greyson and Charlie have lived in our current house for over 10 years. We love the neighborhood and plan to remain in our house for the foreseeable future. I recently entered into a purchase agreement to buy 1711 62nd St. W, which is immediately north of my property 6245 Duck Lake Rd. The 1711 62nd St. W property has a detached garage and an additional small shed. I have partnered with the city planners and engineers to apply for a lot line adjustment to merge a portion of the 1711 property with my existing lot and to be in compliance with the garage coverage city code of 7.5% coverage. Once that lot line adjustment is complete, I will hire a contractor to prepare the merge portion of my property to accommodate the garage including foundation, cement pad, driveway and electric. Upon completion of the prep work, I will hire a professional house moving company (Otting House Movers) to move the detached garage approximately 75 feet to the new foundation. The lot is quite flat and there are no trees or barriers between the current location and the new proposed location. Once moved, the merged property will then be landscaped and resodded. Thank you for serving our community and your consideration. Sincerely, Josh Hohn STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Ben Schneider, Planner I DATE: March 13, 2023 SUBJECT: Holiday Inn Express Pool Addition LOCATION: 7740 Flying Cloud Drive REQUEST: • Site Plan Review on 2.99 acres BACKGROUND The hotel at 7740 Flying Cloud Drive, which was most recently a Comfort Inn, is being rebranded to a Holiday Inn Express. As a part of this rebranding, the building owners are planning to add a pool on the first level. The applicant is therefore requesting a Site Plan Amendment to construct an approximately 1,800 square foot building addition to accommodate this pool. A new patio is also proposed adjacent to the pool addition. Overall, the plans are code compliant and no waivers are requested. This hotel building was initially constructed in 1985 as a Hampton Inn. The site is approximately three acres and is located at the intersection of Flying Cloud Drive and Viking Drive. The parcel also has frontage on Highway 212 to the north, although there is a grade change of roughly 30 feet between the site and the highway. This property is also adjacent to the future LRT line, which will run along Flying Cloud Drive to the south of the site. As a part of the LRT project, approximately 0.2 acres were acquired by the Met Council along the south edge of the property. Proposed Addition Location 2 ZONING AND GUIDE PLAN The property is currently zoned Commercial Regional Service (C-REG-SER), and the 2040 Comprehensive Plan guides the property as Regional Commercial. There are no proposed zoning or comprehensive plan changes. SITE PLAN The applicant is proposing to add an approximately 1,800 square foot building addition along the northwest edge of the hotel on the first level, which is where the new pool would be added. A patio area is also proposed to the west of the addition, as shown in the site plan below. As a part of the Holiday Inn Express rebranding, the owners are also undergoing interior renovations and reducing the number of guestrooms from 119 to 99 in order to create larger suites. The LRT right of way acquisition resulted in several parking stalls encroaching on the required parking setback along the southern lot line. The applicant is proposing to remove these stalls to bring the property back into compliance with this setback. Additional stalls would also be removed Parking stalls near LRT to be removed Location of addition and new patio Two parking islands to be expanded/landscaped 3 on the north side of the site to accommodate the building addition. In total, the plans show 40 parking stalls being removed from the original 155 parking stalls. City Code requires hotels to have one parking stall for every room and one stall for each employee. According to the applicant’s narrative, the hotel has up to 10 employees, which means the required parking count is 109 stalls. With 115 parking stalls shown after the removals, the site would remain compliant with City Code parking requirements. LANDSCAPING The building addition requires an additional six caliper inches to be planted on site. The landscape plan exceeds this requirement with a total of 14.75 caliper inches of new plantings. This includes three deciduous trees, three understory trees, and shrubs/perennials. The new plantings will be installed near the main entrance, around a new infiltration basin to the east of the addition, and on two parking islands that are being expanded to meet current City Code size requirements (shown on the site plan on the previous page). ARCHITECTURE The applicant is proposing to use an architectural precast concrete that will incorporate thin brick. The plans indicate that the brick will “match the brick on the existing building”. The brick for the existing hotel is a mix of tan, light and dark brown brick. Using thin brick in this manner is a permitted Class I material in City Code, which makes the exterior on the proposed addition code compliant. Note that the predominant material shown in the elevation above represents the existing and proposed brick. Holiday Inn Express also utilizes blue lighting to ‘wash’ some of the vertical elements of the building. SIGNAGE The applicant is proposing new signage for the Holiday Inn Express rebranding. All new signs will be required to go through the sign permit process to confirm that the signage will be code compliant. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT The applicant will be installing an infiltration basin system to the east of the new pool addition to mitigate run-off. Existing west façade with new signage Proposed addition 4 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the following request: • Site Plan Review on 2.99 acres This recommendation is based on architectural plans dated 2/21/23, site plans dated 2/20/23, and the staff report dated March 13, 2023, and the following conditions: 1. Prior to the City Council first reading, the applicant shall: a. Submit a 3D rendering of the addition to illustrate the addition and the existing building. 2. Prior to land alteration permit issuance, the applicant shall: a. Submit detailed storm water runoff, wetland, utility, and erosion control plans for review and approval by the City Engineer. b. Submit a landscaping letter of credit or escrow surety equivalent to 150% of the cost of the required landscaping. c. Obtain and provide documentation of Watershed District approval. d. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading. e. Install erosion control at the grading limits of the property for review and approval by the City. ATTACHMENTS Narrative dated 2/21/23 Exterior Elevation 2/21/23 Exterior Elevation colored Overall elevations 1/10/23 Arch. Site Plan 2/221/23 Civil Site Plan 2/20/23 Landscape Plan 2/20/23 Grading and Erosion Control 2/20/23 7933 Grinnell Way Lakeville, Minnesota 55044 Phone (612) 247-5406 E-mail: mike@michaelmonnarchitects.com Michael Monn Architects Date: 2/21/2023 Project: Pool Addition, 7740 Flying Cloud Drive Project #: 21208 Subject: Project Narrative The existing Comfort Inn hotel is in the process of rebranding to a Holiday Inn Express. As part of this conversion, the new brand is requiring an indoor pool be added to the property. 1. The current zoning is C-REG-SER. The future guided land use of this property is to be Regional Commercial. 2. This is a site plan amendment request. The existing hotel building footprint will remain the same. (with the exception of the pool addition) The existing hotel has 119 guestrooms. As part of an interior renovation several rooms will be combined to form suites. The result of this is a reduction of total guestrooms for a revised new total of 99 guestrooms. The existing site parking count is 155 stalls. Based on the revised guestroom counts the parking requirements the revised parking count is to be 109 stalls (99 guestrooms + 10 employees = 109 stalls). The revised parking count is proposed to be 115 stalls. The pool addition is to be located at the northwest corner on the north face of the existing building. The addition will be approximately 1,815 s.f. and will be a single story. The addition will be accessed from the building interior adjacent to the main lobby. As part of this project there will be a new outdoor patio adjacent to the pool addition for guests which will be accessed from the exterior adjacent to the main entrance and will also be accessed from the pool room. The existing building is clad in face brick with EIFS accents. No changes are proposed to the existing building exterior finish distribution. The proposed addition will be fully clad in architectural precast concrete with a thin brick finish to match the existing brick color & finish as close as possible. The addition will be capped with an EIFS cornice to match the existing building. New and renewed landscaping shall be provided to compliment the new entrance monument signage & the addition. End of memo 1 EXTERIOR ELEVATION WEST FACADE - ADDITION 1/4" = 1'-0" TOP OF SLAB EL. 100'-0" TOP OF WALL EL. 114'-6" E10E11E5E3 E13E5E10E10ACCENT BANDE15 Note: The horizontal pattern shown is to simulate a brick pattern & not lap siding 2 EXTERIOR ELEVATION NORTH FACADE - ADDITION 1/4" = 1'-0" E11 E10 E5E3 E12 E11 E10 E10 ACCENT BAND E15 Note: The horizontal pattern shown is to simulate a brick pattern & not lap siding TOP OF SLAB EL. 100'-0" 3 EXTERIOR ELEVATION EAST FACADE - ADDITION 1/4" = 1'-0" TOP OF WALL EL. 114'-8" E11 E10E5E3E11E5E10 E10 ACCENT BAND Note: The horizontal pattern shown is to simulate a brick pattern & not lap siding Elevation Keynotes E1 EXISTING EIFS FINISH - COLOR 1 E2 E3 EXISTING EIFS FINISH - COLOR 2 EXISTING EIFS FINISH - COLOR 3 E4 EXISTING PREFINISHED METAL COPING TO REMAINE5 EXISTING ALUMINUM & GLASS DOOR AND FRAME TO REMAIN E6 EXISTING HOLLOW METAL DOOR AND FRAME TO REMAIN - REPAINT COLOR 3 E7 Exterior Elevation Finish Colors EIFS FINISH - COLOR 1 EIFS FINISH - COLOR 2 EIFS FINISH - COLOR 3 TO MATCH SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 7036 "ACCESSIBLE BEIGE" TO MATCH SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 7039 "VIRTUAL TAUPE" E8 EXTERIOR ELEVATION GENERAL NOTES: 1.ALL EXISTING EIFS TO REMAIN UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED OTHERWISE. ALL EXISTING EIFS TO BE REFINISHED TO NEW COLOR SCHEME. 2.ALL EXISTING EXTERIOR WINDOWS & DOORS TO REMAIN UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED OTHERWISE. E10 E11 E12 E13 EXISTING BRICK VENEER TO REMAIN EIFS FINISH - COLOR 4 TO MATCH SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 2803 "ROOKWOOD TERRA COTTA" E9 NEW ARCHITECTURAL PRECAST CONCRETE W/ THIN BRICK PATTERN FINISH. COLOR TO MATCH EXISTING BUILDING BRICK NEW INSULATED TINTED GLASS IN CLEAR ANODIZED ALUMINUM FRAMES EXISTING ALUMINUM & GLASS WINDOW / PTAC SYSTEM TO REMAIN E14 EXISTING EIFS FINISH - COLOR 4 PREFINISHED METAL SCUPPER & DOWNSPOUT - CLEAR ANODIZED ALUMINUM PAINTED HOLLOW METAL DOOR & FRAME - PAINT TO MATCH COLOR 3 TO MATCH SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 7670 "GRAY SHINGLE" Exterior Elevation Material Distribution - Proposed Addition Existing Building: No proposed changes to existing finishes (new colors on existing materials) Precast Windows EIFS HM Total Addition West Elevation: 404 s.f. (76.8%)57 s.f. (10.8%) 42 s.f. (8.0%) 23 s.f. (4.4%) 526 s.f. Addition North Elevation: 654 s.f. (80%)96 s.f. (11.8%) 67 s.f. (8.2%)817 s.f. Addition East Elevation: 474 s.f (80.7%) 71 s.f (12.1%) 42 s.f. (7.2%)587 s.f. NEW WALL MOUNTED SIGNAGE E15 NEW PAINTED STANDARD PIPE GUARDRAIL or report was prepared by me or under Michael J. Monn Registration. No.: 21772 licensed Architect under the laws of the my direct supervision and that I am a duly State of Minnesota. I hereby certify that this plan, specification All rights reserved. Michael Monn Architects This document is an instrument of copied without prior written consent. service and is the property of Michael Monn Architects., and may not be used or Certification E mike@michaelmonnarchitects.com P (612) 247-5406 LAKEVILLE, MN 55044-9060 7933 GRINNELL WAY Michael Monn Architects 21208 2023-02-21 Issue for Bids Holiday Inn Express 7740 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, MN Enlarged Addition Exterior Elevations A2.2 1 2023-02-21 City Comments 2 3 4 5 6 2023 2/21/2023 E2E8E6E4E2E3E3E5E3E2 E3 E3 E5E2 E2E2E7 1 A2.2 E9E14 Brand Standard Uplighting Blue light fixtures E6E4E2 E3 E3 E5 E7 E6E3E2E4E9 Brand Standard Uplighting Blue light fixtures E3 E3 E5E4E2E3 E2E2E9 E3E2E2 Elevation Keynotes E1 EXISTING EIFS FINISH - COLOR 1 E2 E3 EXISTING EIFS FINISH - COLOR 2 EXISTING EIFS FINISH - COLOR 3 E4 EXISTING PREFINISHED METAL COPING TO REMAINE5 EXISTING ALUMINUM & GLASS DOOR AND FRAME TO REMAIN E6 EXISTING HOLLOW METAL DOOR AND FRAME TO REMAIN - REPAINT COLOR 3 E7 Exterior Elevation Finish Colors EIFS FINISH - COLOR 1 EIFS FINISH - COLOR 2 EIFS FINISH - COLOR 3 TO MATCH SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 7036 "ACCESSIBLE BEIGE" TO MATCH SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 7039 "VIRTUAL TAUPE" E8 EXTERIOR ELEVATION GENERAL NOTES: 1.ALL EXISTING EIFS TO REMAIN UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED OTHERWISE. ALL EXISTING EIFS TO BE REFINISHED TO NEW COLOR SCHEME. 2.ALL EXISTING EXTERIOR WINDOWS & DOORS TO REMAIN UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED OTHERWISE. E10 E11 E12 E13 EXISTING BRICK VENEER TO REMAIN EIFS FINISH - COLOR 4 TO MATCH SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 2803 "ROOKWOOD TERRA COTTA" E9 NEW ARCHITECTURAL PRECAST CONCRETE W/ STAMPED BRICK PATTERN FINISH. COLOR TO MATCH EXISTING BRICK NEW INSULATED TINTED GLASS IN CLEAR ANODIZED ALUMINUM FRAMES EXISTING ALUMINUM & GLASS WINDOW / PTAC SYSTEM TO REMAIN E14 EXISTING EIFS FINISH - COLOR 4 PREFINISHED METAL SCUPPER & DOWNSPOUT - CLEAR ANODIZED ALUMINUM PAINTED HOLLOW METAL DOOR & FRAME - PAINT TO MATCH COLOR 3 TO MATCH SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 7670 "GRAY SHINGLE" Exterior Elevation Material Distribution - Proposed Addition Existing Building: No proposed changes to existing finishes (new colors on existing materials) Precast Windows EIFS HM Total Addition West Elevation: 404 s.f. (76.8%)57 s.f. (10.8%) 42 s.f. (8.0%) 23 s.f. (4.4%) 526 s.f. Addition North Elevation: 654 s.f. (80%)96 s.f. (11.8%) 67 s.f. (8.2%)817 s.f. Addition East Elevation: 474 s.f (80.7%) 71 s.f (12.1%) 42 s.f. (7.2%)587 s.f. NEW WALL MOUNTED SIGNAGE 18'-1 1/2"EQ.EQ. EQ . 7' - 1 " EQ . or report was prepared by me or under Michael J. Monn Registration. No.: 21772 licensed Architect under the laws of the my direct supervision and that I am a duly State of Minnesota. I hereby certify that this plan, specification All rights reserved. Michael Monn Architects This document is an instrument of copied without prior written consent. service and is the property of Michael Monn Architects., and may not be used or Certification E mike@michaelmonnarchitects.com P (612) 247-5406 LAKEVILLE, MN 55044-9060 7933 GRINNELL WAY Michael Monn Architects 21208 date Holiday Inn Express 7740 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, MN Overall Building Exterior Elevations A2.1 1 2 3 4 5 6 2023 1/10/2023 PRELIMINARY DRAWING NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 1/10/2023 2 Exterior Elevation Porte Cochere North Elevation 3/32" = 1'-0"3 Exterior Elevation West Elevation 3/32" = 1'-0"4 Exterior Elevation East Elevation 3/32" = 1'-0" 5 Exterior Elevation South Elevation 3/32" = 1'-0" 1 Exterior Elevation North Elevation 3/32" = 1'-0" 3A Exterior Elevation West Elevation 3/32" = 1'-0" WALL MOUNTED BACKLIT SIGNAGE HOLIDAY INN XLS-SLM-7 EXISTING PORTE COCHERE SOFFIT CONNECTION TO BUILDING EXISTING EIFS CORNICE 3A A2.1 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 1" = 30'-0" SITE PLAN EXISTING 3 STORY HOTEL BUILDING FLYI N G C L O U D D R I V E STATE H I G H W A Y N o . 5 9 10 9 9 8 7 12 15 13 7 12 4 0 5 15 30 60 120 9'-0" T y p . 1 9 ' - 0 " t y p . BUILD I N G S E T B A C K L I N E PROPOSED ADDITION Exist. Trash Existing retai n i n g w a l l s PROPE R T Y L I N E LIGH T R A I L L I N E S 14'-0" 1 8 ' - 0 " 9'-0" 1 8 ' - 0 " S1 S1 S1 New Patio S3 S3 S4S1 V I K I N G D R I V E S5 S5 PARK I N G S E T B A C K L I N E S1 S2 15'-0 " min. 6' - 0 " 6'-3 1/4" 3' - 1 " 4'-0" 1 Monument Signage Backlit Site Entrance Sign 3/8" = 1'-0" or report was prepared by me or under Michael J. Monn Registration. No.: 21772 licensed Architect under the laws of the my direct supervision and that I am a duly State of Minnesota. I hereby certify that this plan, specification All rights reserved. Michael Monn Architects This document is an instrument of copied without prior written consent. service and is the property of Michael Monn Architects., and may not be used or Certification E mike@michaelmonnarchitects.com P (612) 247-5406 LAKEVILLE, MN 55044-9060 7933 GRINNELL WAY Michael Monn Architects 21208 2023-02-21 Issue for Bids Holiday Inn Express 7740 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, MN Site Plan G2 1 2022-11-03 City Comments 2 2023-01-10 City Comments 3 2023-02-21 City Comments 4 5 6 2023 2/21/2023 Site Data Site Area:Approx. 130,381 s.f (+/- 2.99 acres) Zoning Classification:C-REG-SER (Commercial Regional Service District) Existing Building Area:16,157 s.f. (footprint) 48,363 s.f. Total 3 story building Proposed Building Area:16,157 s.f. (footprint first floor) 1,815 s.f. (addition) 17,972 s.f. proposed footprint 32,314 s.f. (levels 2 & 3) 50,286 s.f. Total building area (3 story building) Site Setbacks:Minimum front yard;35 feet Minimum one side yard;20 feet Minimum of both side yards;40 feet Minimum rear yard;10 feet Max. Floor area ratio:0.4 (Multi-story) 130,381 x 0.4 = 52,152 s.f. maximum allowable area Max. Base area ratio:0.2 (Multi-story) 130,381 x 0.2 = 26,076 s.f. maximum allowable area Max. Building Height:40 feet Proposed Building Height:34 feet Parking Required:Motels/Hotels - One stall per guestroom + One stall per employee 99 Stalls + 10 Employees = 109 Stalls required Existing Parking:155 Stalls (including 5 accessible stalls) Proposed Parking:115 Stalls (including 5 accessible stalls) Total Number of Guestrooms:99 (reduced from 119) Total Employees/Max. shift:10 Site Plan Keynotes S1 EXISTING PARKING STALLS TO BE REMOVED S2 NEW MONUMENT SIGNAGE - SEE 1/G2 S3 NEW LANDSCAPE ISLAND W/ CURB & GUTTER TO ALIGN WITH EXISTING PAVING S4 NEW INFILTRATION POND - REFER TO CIVIL DRAWINGS S5 ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL - FIELD VERIFY EXISTING PAVING SLOPES TO COMPLY WITH THE 2% MAX. SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION. X X X X X X X X X X X X E E 4 I E D H E D H G C A C B E D C A RELOCATED LIGHT POST NEW CURB TO END AT CONCRETE PAD FOR TRASH ENCLOSURE. RELOCATED SIGN 9' 2 5 ' 2 ' I 24 ' R14' R4' 4 4 ' DEPENDING ON PAVEMENT CONDITION AFTER CONSTRUCTION ADDITIONAL REPLACEMENT MAY BE NEEDED C A C A R3' R3' J 15' INFILTRATION BASIN N: \ 0 0 3 8 0 3 3 . 0 0 \ D W G \ C I V I L \ 0 0 3 8 0 3 3 - S P 0 1 . D W G 08 03 7740 FLYING CLOUD DR. EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 02/20/23 NTM NTM DJW HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS RENOVATION SITE PLAN 7933 GRINNELL WAY LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 HO L I D A Y I N N E X P R E S S R E N O V A T I O N 09/19/22 RYAN BLUHM 4125702/20/23 MICHAEL MONN ARCHITECTS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © 2 0 2 2 W e s t w o o d P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s , I n c . Common Ground Alliance Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com 10' 2' OR 1' 0'10'20'30' 1" = 10' 10/14/22 12/12/22 02/20/23 . . ADDED LANDSCAPE PLAN CITY COMMENTS CITY COMMENTS . .PROJECT NUMBER: 0038033 SHEET NUMBER: VERTICAL SCALE: DATE: PREPARED FOR: OF HORIZONTAL SCALE: DRAWN: CHECKED: DESIGNED:INITIAL ISSUE: REVISIONS: Phone   :hLWeZaWer 'rLYe 6XLWe  Fax  0LnneWonNa 01  Toll Free   DATE:LICENSE NO. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 1.BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THIS PROJECT PROVIDED BY COMPANY, CITY, STATE, DATE. 2.LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY SITE CONDITIONS AND UTILITY LOCATIONS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE FOUND, THE ENGINEER SHOULD BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY. 3.REFER TO BOUNDARY SURVEY FOR LOT BEARINGS, DIMENSIONS AND AREAS. 4.ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB OR EXTERIOR FACE OF BUILDING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5.REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND LOCATIONS OF EXITS, RAMPS, AND TRUCK DOCKS. 6.ALL CURB RADII ARE SHALL BE 3.0 FEET (TO FACE OF CURB) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 7.ALL CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE B612 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAGGERS AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. PLACEMENT OF THESE DEVICES SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY AND ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MNDOT STANDARDS. 9.BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT AND CONCRETE SECTIONS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. 10.CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN FULL ACCESS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING CONSTRUCTION AND TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. 11.SITE LIGHTING SHOWN ON PLAN IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY. REFER TO LIGHTING PLAN PREPARED BY OTHERS FOR SITE LIGHTING DETAILS AND PHOTOMETRICS. GENERAL SITE NOTES PROPERTY LINE NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS SITE LIGHTING EXISTING PROPOSED FENCE NORMAL DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT TRAFFIC SIGN CONCRETE SIDEWALK SITE LEGEND 5 A B612 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER B CONCRETE SIDEWALK C BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (MATCH EXISTING SECTION) D MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER E EXISTING CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER TO REMAIN G PARKING LOT STRIPING H PLANTED AREA (MATCH EXISTING) I PROPOSED STAIRCASE & RAILING W/ CONCRETE SIDEWALK J PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGN (BY OTHERS) ASITE KEYNOTES TOTAL DISTURBED AREA:4,840 SF · IMPERVIOUS SURFACE CHANGE: EXISTING PROPOSED · PERVIOUS SURFACE:920 SF 11,688 SF ·PARKING PARKING REMOVED SURFACE PARKING 22 SPACES 21 TYPICAL SPACES 1 ADA SPACE SITE REDEVELOPMENT AREA SUMMARY X X X X X X X X X X X X E E 4 ROCK MULCH (TYP.) 3-KFG 17-LPS ROCK MULCH (TYP.) 2-PFC SOD 1-RVB 14-SDO EDGING (TYP.) EDGING (TYP.) ROCK MULCH (TYP.) SOD2-SWO 1-PFC 4-KFG 31-SDO 8-BSJ ROCK MULCH (TYP.) EDGING (TYP.) 4-EXISTING JUNIPERS TO REMAIN 1-SKJ 7-LPS 21-SDO 2-SKJ 25-KFG 9-LPS SOD SOD PROPOSED LANDSCAPE BED TO TIE INTO EXISTING LANDSCAPE BED EDGING (TYP.) ROCK MULCH (TYP.) MONUMENT SIGN (BY OTHERS) N: \ 0 0 3 8 0 3 3 . 0 0 \ D W G \ C I V I L \ 0 0 3 8 0 3 3 - L P 0 1 . D W G 08 07 7740 FLYING CLOUD DR. EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 02/20/23 NTM NTM DJW HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS RENOVATION LANDSCAPE PLAN 7933 GRINNELL WAY LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 HO L I D A Y I N N E X P R E S S R E N O V A T I O N 09/19/22 NICHOLAS T. MEYER 5377402/20/23 MICHAEL MONN ARCHITECTS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © 2 0 2 2 W e s t w o o d P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s , I n c . Common Ground Alliance Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com 9.999998' 2' OR 1' 0'10'20'30' 1" = 10' 10/14/22 12/12/22 02/20/23 . . ADDED LANDSCAPE PLAN CITY COMMENTS CITY COMMENTS . .PROJECT NUMBER: 0038033 SHEET NUMBER: VERTICAL SCALE: DATE: PREPARED FOR: OF HORIZONTAL SCALE: DRAWN: CHECKED: DESIGNED:INITIAL ISSUE: REVISIONS: Phone   :hLWeZaWer 'rLYe 6XLWe  Fax  0LnneWonNa 01  Toll Free   DATE:LICENSE NO. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TOTAL REQUIRED LANDSCAPE: 6 CALIPER INCHES TOTAL CALIPER INCHES REQUIRED: THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF CALIPER INCHES OF TREES REQUIRED SHALL BE DETERMINED BY DIVIDING THE TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ALL FLOORS OF A BUILDING BY THREE HUNDRED TWENTY (320). -TOTAL GROSS BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE : 1,851 SQ. FT. / 320 = 5.78 CALIPER INCHES PLANTING BEDS AND/OR DECORATIVE PLANTING CONTAINERS MAY REPLACE UP TO TWENTY-FIVE (25%) OF THE REQUIRED CALIPER INCHES FOR TREES AT A RATE OF THREE (3) CALIPER INCHES OF TREES PER FIVE HUNDRED (500) SQUARE FEET OF CUMULATIVE PLANTING BEDS AND/OR DECORATIVE PLANTING CONTAINERS. -25% OF 6 CAL.= 1.5 CAL. -1.5 CAL.= 186 SQ. FT. OF PLANTING BEDS NO MORE THAN 80% OF TREES MAY BE OF MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT UNDERSTORY TREES MAY MAKE UP NO MORE THAN TWENTY PERCENT (20%) OF THE TOTAL TREE CALIPER INCHES REQUIRED. LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS PRELIMINARY PLANT SCHEDULE ORNAMENTAL TREE PLANT LEGEND SHRUBS / GRASSES EDGER MONOCULTURE SEEDING FOX SEDGE / CAREX VULPINOIDEA TOTAL AREA (.01 AC) Prairie Fire Crabapple / Malus 'Prairiefire'1.5" CAL, B.B.AS SHOWN * ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE SODDED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE H 15'-20' W 15'-20' COMMON/BOTANICAL NAME SIZE SPACING O.C. Little Princess Spirea / Spirea japonica 'Little Princess' 3'-0" O.C.#5 CONT. MATURE SIZE H 3' W 3' ORNAMENTAL TREES - 3 SHRUBS - 44 ABBREVIATIONS: B&B = BALLED AND BURLAPPED CAL. = CALIPER HT. = HEIGHT MIN. =MINIMUM O.C. = ON CENTER SP. = SPREAD QTY .= QUANTITY CONT. = CONTAINER NOTE: QUANTITIES ON PLAN SUPERSEDE LIST QUANTITIES IN THE EVENT OF A DISCREPANCY. PERENNIALS - 98 Karl Foerster Grass / Calamagrostis x acutiflora 'Karl Foerster'30" O.C.#1 CONT.H 3'-5' W 3' TOTAL PROVIDED LANDSCAPE: 14.75 CALIPER INCHES DECIDUOUS OVERSTORY TREES -3 TREES X 3 CAL. = 9 CAL. ORNAMENTAL TREES -3 TREES X 1.5 CAL. = 4.5 CAL. SHRUBS/PERENNIALS -742 SQ. FT. TOTAL, 185 SQ. FT. ACCEPTED FOR 25% OF REQUIRED CAL. IN. = 1.25 CAL. LANDSCAPE PROVISIONS NATIVE SEEDING LEGENDGROUNDCOVER LEGEND SOD 3"-6" RIVER ROCK MULCH OVERSTORY TREES - 3 River Birch / Betula nigra 10' BB, CLUMP AS SHOWN H 50'-75' W 50' Sky High Juniper / Juniperus scopulorum 'Bailigh' 4'-0" O.C.#5 CONT.H 12'-15' W 3'-5' CODE QTY RVB PFC SKJ LPS KFG 1 3 3 33 32 * WITHIN INFILTRATION BASIN (100 PLUGS) - BLUE FLAG IRIS / IRIS VERICOLOR TO BE PLANTED IN SMALL MASSES ( 5-10 PLUGS PER MASS) TO GROW AMONGST SEEDING. Swamp White Oak / Quercus bicolor 3" CAL, B.B.AS SHOWN H 50'-60' W 40'SWO 2 Blue Star Juniper / Juniperus squamata 'Blue Star' 4'-0" O.C.#5 CONT.H 4' W 4'BSJ 8 Stella de Oro Daylily / Hemerocallis 'Stella de Oro'24" O.C.#1 CONT.H 15" W 12"-18"SDO 66 OVERSTORY TREE 900 EX-MH RE = 902.76 EX-MH RE = 903.39 EX-MH RE = 907.33 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 908.36 906.98 905.58 904.19 906.54 907.21 904.07 905 905 900 905 906 907 908 908 909 909 INFILT. BASIN OUTLET=905.0 BOT=903.7 HWL=905.33 BERM=905.8 904.23 905.37 905.87BC 904.57BC 904.69BC 904.73BC 904.93BC 904.43 905.00BC 905.80 905.80 905.80 905.80 9 0 8 907 908 906 907 908 906 907 905 90 6 9 0 7 909 905 905 904 905 904 906 907 9 0 8 906 907 906 907 9 0 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 908.50 908.60 908.60 909.18 909.18 909.18 908.84 908.84 908.75907.75 907.44 907.49 908.80 909.18 2.39% 2.08 % 2.25% 2.58% 1.89% 2 . 0 0 % 908.97 909.07 2. 0 0 % 908.50 BW=906.00 BW=908.00 5. 0 0 % 904.58 904.63 E.O.F. 905.00 3: 1 3 : 1 3:1 3 : 1 3 : 1 6:1 N: \ 0 0 3 8 0 3 3 . 0 0 \ D W G \ C I V I L \ 0 0 3 8 0 3 3 - G D 0 1 . D W G 08 04 7740 FLYING CLOUD DR. EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 02/20/23 NTM NTM DJW HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS RENOVATION GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN7933 GRINNELL WAY LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 HO L I D A Y I N N E X P R E S S R E N O V A T I O N 09/19/22 RYAN BLUHM 4125702/20/23 MICHAEL MONN ARCHITECTS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © 2 0 2 2 W e s t w o o d P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s , I n c . Common Ground Alliance Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com 10' 2' OR 1' 0'10'20'30' 1" = 10' 10/14/22 12/12/22 02/20/23 . . ADDED LANDSCAPE PLAN CITY COMMENTS CITY COMMENTS . .PROJECT NUMBER: 0038033 SHEET NUMBER: VERTICAL SCALE: DATE: PREPARED FOR: OF HORIZONTAL SCALE: DRAWN: CHECKED: DESIGNED:INITIAL ISSUE: REVISIONS: Phone   :hLWeZaWer 'rLYe 6XLWe  Fax  0LnneWonNa 01  Toll Free   DATE:LICENSE NO. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA PROPERTY LINE 982 980 EXISTING PROPOSED INDEX CONTOUR INTERVAL CONTOUR982 980 SPOT ELEVATION FLOW DIRECTION CURB AND GUTTER GRADING LEGEND 1.LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY SITE CONDITIONS AND UTILITY LOCATIONS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION. THE ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE FOUND. 2.CONTRACTORS SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF VESTIBULE, SLOPED PAVEMENT, EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, TRUCK DOCKS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS, EXACT BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS, AND EXACT LOCATIONS AND NUMBER OF DOWNSPOUTS. 3.ALL EXCAVATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT EDITION OF "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR TRENCH EXCAVATION AND BACKFILL/SURFACE RESTORATION" AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA. 4.ALL DISTURBED UNPAVED AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE SIX INCHES OF TOPSOIL AND SOD OR SEED. THESE AREAS SHALL BE WATERED UNTIL A HEALTHY STAND OF GRASS IS OBTAINED. SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR PLANTING AND TURF ESTABLISHMENT. 5.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. PLACEMENT OF THESE DEVICES SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MNDOT STANDARDS. 6.ALL SLOPES SHALL BE GRADED TO 3:1 OR FLATTER, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED ON THIS SHEET. 7.CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING AND PROVIDE A SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITH UNIFORM SLOPES BETWEEN POINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES. 8.SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOWN INDICATE FINISHED PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS & GUTTER FLOW LINE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PROPOSED CONTOURS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE GRADE. 9.SEE SOILS REPORT FOR PAVEMENT THICKNESSES AND HOLD DOWNS. 10.CONTRACTOR SHALL DISPOSE OF ANY EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL THAT EXISTS AFTER THE SITE GRADING AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DISPOSE OF ALL EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL IN A MANNER ACCEPTABLE TO THE OWNER AND THE REGULATING AGENCIES. 11.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A STRUCTURAL RETAINING WALL DESIGN CERTIFIED BY A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. 12.ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL RULES INCLUDING THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. 13.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF ANY STRUCTURE OR PAVEMENT, A PROOF ROLL, AT MINIMUM, WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE SUBGRADE. PROOF ROLLING SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY MAKING MINIMUM OF 2 COMPLETE PASSES WITH FULLY-LOADED TANDEM-AXLE DUMP TRUCK, OR APPROVED EQUAL, IN EACH OF 2 PERPENDICULAR DIRECTIONS WHILE UNDER SUPERVISION AND DIRECTION OF THE INDEPENDENT TESTING LABORATORY. AREAS OF FAILURE SHALL BE EXCAVATED AND RE-COMPACTED AS SPECIFIED HEREIN. 14.EMBANKMENT MATERIAL PLACED BENEATH BUILDINGS AND STREET OR PARKING AREAS SHALL BE COMPACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFIED DENSITY METHOD AS OUTLINED IN MNDOT 2105.3F1 AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. 15.EMBANKMENT MATERIAL NOT PLACED IN THE BUILDING PAD, STREETS OR PARKING AREA, SHALL BE COMPACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF THE ORDINARY COMPACTION METHOD AS OUTLINED IN MNDOT 2105.3F2. 16.ALL SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY AN INDEPENDENT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. EXCAVATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF REMOVING UNSTABLE OR UNSUITABLE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED AS REQUIRED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOILS TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. GRADING NOTES 0.00% 900.00 900.00 BIO-ROLL INLET PROTECTION EROSION CONTROL BLANKET TOP AND BOTTOM OF RETAINING WALL EMERGENCY OVERFLOW TW=XXX.XX BW=XXX.XX E.O.F. INLET SEDIMENT CONTROL (TYP.) BIO-ROLL (TYP.) BIO-ROLL (TYP.) RIP RAP OVERFLOW (TYP.) TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL BLANKET (TYP.) POST CONSTRUCTION SEDIMENT CONTROL (TYP.) 1.THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS ARE BASED ON RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES AND LIMITED MEASUREMENTS TAKEN IN THE FIELD. THE INFORMATION SHALL NOT BE RELIED ON AS BEING EXACT OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE OWNER OR ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES. 2.EROSION AND SILTATION CONTROL (ESC): THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSUME COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONTROLLING ALL SILTATION AND EROSION OF THE PROJECT AREA. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL USE WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY TO CONTROL THE EROSION AND SILTATION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: CATCH BASIN INSERTS, CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES, EROSION CONTROL BLANKET, AND SILT FENCE. ESC SHALL COMMENCE WITH GRADING AND CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT UNTIL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK BY THE OWNER. THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY INCLUDES ALL IMPLEMENTATION AS REQUIRED TO PREVENT EROSION AND THE DEPOSITING OF SILT. THE OWNER MAY DIRECT THE CONTRACTOR'S METHODS AS DEEMED FIT TO PROTECT PROPERTY AND IMPROVEMENTS. ANY DEPOSITION OF SILT OR MUD ON NEW OR EXISTING PAVEMENT OR IN EXISTING STORM SEWERS OR SWALES SHALL BE REMOVED AFTER EACH RAIN EVENT. AFFECTED AREAS SHALL BE CLEANED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER, ALL AT THE EXPENSE OF THE CONTRACTOR. ALL TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE CONTRACTOR AFTER THE TURF IS ESTABLISHED. 3.SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AROUND SITE IN ALL FILL AREAS AND LOCATIONS WHERE STORM WATER RUNOFF MAY LEAVE THE SITE, PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. 4.ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE WILL BE INSTALLED AT ALL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES. 5.ALL STREETS DISTURBED DURING WORKING HOURS MUST BE CLEANED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY. A CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE TO THE SITE MUST BE PROVIDED ACCORDING TO DETAILS TO REDUCE TRACKING OF DIRT ONTO PUBLIC STREETS. 6.CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL TEMPORARY INLET PROTECTIONS (WIMCO OR EQUIVALENT) AROUND ALL CATCH BASIN GRATE INLETS, AFFECTED BY THIS CONSTRUCTION. 7.ALL UNPAVED AREAS ALTERED DUE TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES MUST BE RESTORED WITH SEED AND MULCH, SOD, EROSION CONTROL BLANKET OR BE HARD SURFACE WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. 8.FOR AREAS WITH SLOPE OF 3:1 OR GREATER, RESTORATION WITH SOD OR EROSION CONTROL BLANKET IS REQUIRED. 9.PUBLIC STREETS USED FOR HAULING SHALL BE KEPT FREE OF SOIL AND DEBRIS. STREET SWEEPING SHALL BE CONCURRENT WITH SITE WORK. GENERAL EROSION CONTROL NOTES BIO-ROLL (TYP.) BIO-ROLL (TYP.) BOTTOM OF CONCRETE STAIRWELL TO MATCH EXISTING GRADE DISCLAIMER: The City of Eden Prairie does not warranty the accuracy nor the correctnessoftheinformationcontainedinthismap.Itisyourresponsibilitytoverifytheaccuracyofthisinformation.InnoeventwillTheCityofEdenPrairiebeliableforanydamages,includinglossofbusiness,lostprofits,businessinterruption,lossofbusinessinformationorotherpecuniarylossthatmightarisefromtheuseofthismaportheinformationitcontains.Mapinformationisbelievedtobeaccuratebutaccuracyisnotguaranteed.AnyerrorsoromissionsshouldbereportedtoTheCityofEdenPrairie. *Any aerial photography and parcel geometry was obtained from Hennepin County and allusersareboundbytheexpresswrittencontractbetweenHennepinCountyandtheCityofEdenPrairie. Scale:1:2,400 ²0 110 220 ft ProMect Site ProMect Location Map  Holiday Inn Pool Addition ProMect Address: 40 )lying Cloud Dr. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner DATE: March 13, 2023 SUBJECT: Code Change – City Code Chapter 11, creating a Mixed Use zoning district BACKGROUND The Comprehensive Plan, ASPIRE 2040, established a Mixed Use land use category with the intent to provide for a mix of differing but compatible land uses that, due to their location, would not qualify for Transit Oriented (TOD) or Town Center (TC) zoning. ASPIRE 2040 identified three areas of the city for this potential zoning district, pictured below. They include primarily Eden Prairie Center and surrounding commercial properties, Flying Cloud Commons (Chick Fil A, Bank of America, Future Grocery) and Fountain Place (Michaels, Home Goods etc.). The third area identified by ASPIRE 2040 included parcels at Venture Lane and Martin Drive. With a greater understanding of market conditions and land uses in the area, staff will be reevaluating the potential of re-guiding the Venture Lane and Martin Drive parcels from Mixed Use to another appropriate land use category in the future. OBJECTIVES The Mixed-Use Zoning ordinance is intended to provide an additional avenue for redevelopment or reinvestment in the property without loss of existing rights and opportunities provided by existing code, while adding in the flexibility of developing multi-family residential uses. Much of the Intent and Purpose listed in the draft echoes those statements in the Commercial-Regional-Service (C-Reg- Staff Report – March 13, 2023 Page 2 2 Ser) and Regional Commercial (C-Reg) zoning districts, which represents much of the existing zoning of the areas guided Mixed Use in Aspire 2040. Development of mixed-use projects is expected to be in the form of vertical (where two or more use classifications are in one building), or horizontal, (two or more use classifications in two or more buildings, in one or more lots). Because some parcels are smaller, making horizontal mixed use unlikely, provisions were made for these lots, permitting the ‘combination’ of two or more separate parcels into a cohesive development, regardless of the timing of construction. PROPOSED CODE CHANGES As noted above, the proposed ordinance is patterned after the C-Reg-Ser and C-Reg zoning districts. C-Reg-Ser is the current zoning of the parcels around the mall, including the Fountain Place area. The Eden Prairie Center itself is zoned C-Reg. There are two parcels zoned office, north of the mall. Following is a summary of the proposed ordinance, by subdivision. Design Guidelines (Subdivision 2) The proposed district adopts the same Architectural Standards found in other commercial, industrial, and high-density residential districts. The one difference is the stated goal of a cohesive site design. It is not expected that each development look the same as its’ neighbor but that there be thoughtful application of design elements, including signage, lighting, building materials, or architectural style in the development of multi-building mixed use projects. The table below compares the proposed uses, which would be permitted in the Mixed-Use zoning district with the Regional commercial districts, Office, and with the RM-2.5 zoning district, which is the high density residential district. Uses (Subd 3) Standard Mixed Use (proposed) C-REG C-REG-SER RM-2.5 OFC Commercial Direct Retail Sales and Services Yes Yes Yes No Limited Day Care Facilities Yes Yes Yes No Yes Small Brewer with Taproom Yes Yes Yes No No Micro-Distillery Yes Yes Yes No No Gasoline/ convenience stores Yes Yes Yes No No Office Business and Yes Yes Yes No Yes Staff Report – March 13, 2023 Page 3 3 Professional Offices Residential Multiple Family Attached Dwellings Yes N N Yes No Public Infrastructure Antennas and Towers, not at a principal use Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Public Infrastructure Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Building Bulk and Dimension Standards (Subd 5) The proposed ordinance was developed to avoid creating additional non-conformities. This will not eliminate the need for waivers in the future, though reasonable projects can be built without them. Standard Mixed Use (Proposed) C-REG C-REG-SER RM-2.5 OFC Lot Size 10,000 sq ft 50 acres 10,000 25,000 20,000 Lot Width 80 ft. min. 80 150 100 Lot Depth 100 ft. min. 100 150 100 Front Yard Setback 25 (ft) 80 35 35 35 Side Yard Setback 20 (ft) 80/ 160 20 25 20/50 Rear Yard Setback 10 (ft) 60 10 30 20 Maximum Building Height 60 (ft) 40 40 45 30 Street Façade Building Stepback 8 ft min. (above 4 floors) Usable Outdoor Open Space 5% of lot area min. Not listed Not listed Not specified Not listed Usable Open Space Park Dedication plus 150 sq ft / residential unit Not listed Not listed Park Ded. Plus 150 Sq ft/ unit Not listed Residential Density 40-75 Units/ acre Not Permitted Not Permitted Varies Not Permitted Maximum FAR 0.5 1 Story 1.0 Multi story 2.0 Multi story with Res 0.2 1 Story 0.4 Multi story 0.2 1 Story 0.4 Multi story N/A 0.3 1 story 0.5 Multi story Performance Standards (Subd 6) Recognizing the area is dominated with highway characteristics and uses, the Performance Standards adopts the same standards found elsewhere for drive-thrus, though the ordinance articulates the Staff Report – March 13, 2023 Page 4 4 City’s expectation that sites should be designed to promote safe pedestrian travel within a site. These features have been negotiated as part of redevelopment in the past. Parking (Subd 7) The parking standards reflect the expectation that parking will be shared between uses in a mixed use development, in particular those parking requirements for retail stores/services and Shopping Center. Reflecting this sharing of spaces, the parking ratio for these uses is reduced from what is prescribed for the balance of the city. Additionally, if a property owner can demonstrate there is adequate parking for business need, there are no competing peak demands and that there is a shared parking agreement between the properties (if on separate parcels), the city can reduce the parking requirement up to an additional 20% without waivers. The ordinance also reduces to zero the parking setbacks for side and rear yards where there is a shared parking lot situation. Landscaping standards still apply. Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities (Subd 8) The Mixed Use ordinance introduces high density residential to areas dominated by commercial uses. Given the dynamic expectations of the area, it is appropriate to accommodate and support alternative means of transportation. Though long encouraged in commercial areas, the Mixed Use district requires pedestrian (benches, other street furniture) and bicycle parking facilities, though at a rate ½ of what is required in the Town Center and Transit Oriented Development zoning districts. Signage (Subd 9) As signage can be an important factor in establishing character of commercial districts, the Mixed Use ordinance requires a sign master plan at the time of development/redevelopment. Though final text and users are not expected to be established or identified at this stage, the size, location, materials, and lighting would be. Signage standards for the Mixed Use Zoning District are the same as what is permitted in the Commercial districts. Supplemental analysis or study (Subd 10) The areas intended for mixed use are largely built out. It is important to understand the impact additional high intensity residential, or substantial redevelopment would have on the area. This section informs the developer that additional study may be necessary, including traffic and parking. Additionally, for office projects, the City will expect some study of the traffic demand, an understanding of how the office users’ trips may be distributed over a variety of transportation methods. The requirements of these studies can be found in other zoning districts and are not unique to the Mixed Use Zoning District. Application The request before the Commission is to review and take action on the proposed Mixed Use regulations only. This request does not include rezoning of parcels that are guided for Mixed Use. A Staff Report – March 13, 2023 Page 5 5 rezoning action will be initiated by a property owner as part of a proposal to redevelop their property. Public Outreach The Mixed Use Zoning District was shared conceptually with the Chamber of Commerce on October 6th, 2022. A draft of the ordinance was shared with Nancy Litwin, General Manager of Eden Prairie Center prior to publication, which was then shared with Mall Ownership. To date, staff has received verbal comments from Ms. Litwin and Mall Ownership. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the ordinance establishing a Mixed Use Zoning District as drafted. 1 DRAFT March 13, 2023 MIXED USE DISTRICT 1 Subd. 1. Intent and Purpose. The intent of the Mixed Use (MU) Zoning District is to promote the 2 reinvestment in and economic vitality of the major shopping center and surrounding areas by providing 3 a mix of differing but compatible land uses in select areas of the community not eligible for the Transit 4 Oriented Development (TOD) or Town Center (TC) zoning districts. The purposes of the MU zoning 5 district are to: 6 A. Provide a site at an appropriate location for a major shopping center which serves a wider 7 region than the City itself consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. 8 B. Provide concentrated opportunities for multi-family residential buildings, retail stores, offices, 9 service establishments, and amusement establishments for the convenience of the public and in 10 mutually beneficial relationship to each other; 11 C. Ensure development occurs in accordance with high standards of cohesive site planning, 12 architecture, and landscape design. 13 D. Maximize connections between various land uses, including promoting mobility for pedestrians 14 and bicycles. 15 E. Provide adequate space to meet the needs of modern commercial development, including off-16 street and bicycle parking and truck loading areas; 17 F. Provide opportunities for attached family living at a reasonable density consistent with sound 18 standards of public health and safety. 19 Subd 2. Design Guidelines. All new development, redevelopment, and subdivisions within the MU 20 zoning district must comply with the architectural standards established in Section 11.03 and 21 conform to the City’s Design Guidelines. 22 Subd. 3. Use Classifications and Permitted Uses. The MU zoning district is intended to provide for a mix 23 of use classifications. More than one use classification must be included within a development project 24 area in the MU zoning district. The mix of uses may be found vertically (two uses within single building), 25 or horizontally (two or more uses in separate buildings on the same or adjacent lots). 26 The following use classifications are permitted in the MU zoning district. Within each use classification, 27 permitted uses are listed below: 28 A. Commercial Permitted Uses 29 1. Direct retail sales to users of goods and services conducted within structures and 30 accessory uses. 31 2. Day care facility 32 3. Small brewer with brewer taproom 33 2 DRAFT March 13, 2023 4. Microdistillery with cocktail room 34 B. Office Permitted Uses 35 1. Business and professional offices 36 2. Medical and dental clinics 37 C. Residential Permitted Uses 38 1. Multiple family attached dwellings Offices for the sole purpose of leasing on-site 39 residential units are not considered an office use for the purpose of determining if a 40 project is mixed use. 41 D. Public Infrastructure Permitted Uses 42 1. Antennas and towers, in those locations and subject to the limitations contained in 43 Section 11.06. Antennas and towers may not be a principal use. 44 2. Public infrastructure 45 Subd. 4. Required Conditions 46 A. An application to rezone property to MU will be considered only based on the Comprehensive 47 Guide Plan for the entire area to be rezoned and specific plans for structures and site 48 development or redevelopment. 49 B. Proposals for development or redevelopment in the MU zoning district will be reviewed by 50 the City as part of the Site Plan and Architectural Design Review processes outlined in Section 51 11.03 or as part of the PUD review process as provided in Section 11.40. 52 C. To be considered a mixed-use project permitted in the MU district, the project must incorporate 53 two or more use classifications, i.e., residential, commercial, or office. Proposals for 54 development or redevelopment proposals in the MU zoning district must establish a cohesive 55 site design through the use of complementary elements including but not limited to building 56 materials, architectural style, landscaping, lighting fixtures, and signage. Proposals may include 57 the incorporation of elements found in nearby mixed-use projects as a means of establishing a 58 cohesive design. 59 E. Acceptable, approved sanitary sewer, and water services must be provided to all occupied 60 structures. 61 F. Any provision contained in this section that is inconsistent with or in conflict with any other 62 provision of the City Code will supersede such other provisions. 63 64 3 DRAFT March 13, 2023 Subd. 5. Building Bulk and Dimension Standards. 65 A. The following minimum standards apply in the MU district, unless otherwise noted: 66 Standard MU Lot Size 10,000 sq ft Lot Width 80 ft. min. Lot Depth 100 ft. min. Front Yard Setback 25 ft Side Yard Setback 20 ft Rear Yard Setback 10 ft Maximum Building Height 60 ft Street Façade Building Stepback 8 ft min. (above 4 floors) Usable Outdoor Open Space 5% of lot area min. Usable Open Space Park Dedication plus 150 sq ft / residential unit Residential Density 40-75 Units/ acre Maximum Floor Area Ratio 0.5-1 Story 1.0-Multi story 2.0 Multi-story with Residential Maximum Base Area Ratio 0.5 67 B. The following minimum standards apply for all accessory structures in the MU district. 68 Standard MU Maximum Height 40 feet 4 DRAFT March 13, 2023 Min. Distance to Side lot line 20 feet Min. Distance to Rear Lot Line 10 feet 69 Subd. 6. Vehicular and Pedestrian Safety Standards. Development in the MU district will include 70 vehicular and pedestrian transportation systems serving the development. Development or 71 redevelopment proposals in the MU district must include design elements that prioritize safe and 72 efficient vehicular and pedestrian mobility. Development or redevelopment proposals must incorporate 73 site design that will accomplish the following: 74 A. Minimize vehicular interaction with pedestrians and bicycles and where necessary as 75 determined by the City, highlight this interaction through color, materials, and texture. 76 B. Promote pedestrian visibility throughout the site. 77 C. Drive thrus are permitted only in compliance with the following standards: 78 1. Drive-thru stacking lanes must be screened as required by Section 11.03. 79 2. The site must accommodate adequate on-site vehicle queuing. Overflow stacking may 80 not occur on public or private roads. 81 Subd. 7. Off-Street Parking Standards. Because the sharing of trips generated within a development is a 82 primary facet of mixed-use development, it is expected that access drives, parking, and internal 83 circulation for sites in the MU district will be shared between uses on site and with adjacent sites. This 84 shared access supports the lowering of parking requirements, reduction of parking lot setbacks, and 85 coordination of site accesses. The following minimum parking standards apply to all properties in the 86 MU district: 87 Use # of spaces (min) Multiple-Family Residential 2 per dwelling unit (d.u.); 1 per studio or efficiency unit Half of all spaces must be enclosed Independent Senior Living 1.5 per d.u. Half of all spaces must be enclosed Nursing Home/Assisted Senior Living 1/4 beds at design capacity, plus 1 space for each employee on largest 5 DRAFT March 13, 2023 shift. Half of all spaces must be enclosed Retail Stores & Services 4.5/1,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable area (G.L.A.) Shopping Center (retail areas greater than 200,000 sq ft) 4.25/ 1000 sq ft of G.L.A Restaurant, Type 1 Restaurant, Type 2 Restaurant, Type 3 1 / 2.5 seats based on capacity 1 / 3 seats based on capacity 1 / 2 seats based on capacity Office 3/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. Hotel 1/guest room + 1/employee Other Uses Refer to parking requirements in Section 11.03 or as designated by the City Manager. 88 A. Location. Off-street parking facilities must be on the same parcel of land as the structure they 89 are intended to serve, except where a shared parking or cross access easement agreement 90 exists. 91 B. Reduction. The on-site, off-street parking requirements for a project may be reduced up to 20% 92 if the following standards can be met: 93 1. Parking spaces will be shared between two complimentary uses, subject to the 94 following: 95 a. The applicant must demonstrate that, because of the hours, size, and operation 96 of the respective and future uses, there is no substantial conflict in the 97 peak parking demands of the uses for which shared use of off-98 street parking facilities is proposed, and there will be an adequate amount 99 of parking available to meet the needs for each use. 100 b. A shared parking plan must be submitted that includes specific analysis on the 101 peaking characteristics of the various and future uses that will share parking. 102 c. Prior to the earlier of the City’s issuance of a building permit for the project or 103 release of a final plat for the project, whichever occurs first, a shared parking, 104 cross access easement, or similar agreement documenting the shared parking 105 6 DRAFT March 13, 2023 arrangement must be approved by the City Planner and filed against both 106 properties with the County Recorder and/or Registrar of Titles’ office, as 107 appropriate. 108 C. Surface Parking Lot Setbacks. The following setbacks apply for surface parking lots in the MU 109 district: 110 1. Front Yard: A surface parking lot may not occupy the required front yard. On a corner 111 lot, a surface parking lot may not occupy more than one-half (½) of the required front 112 yard closest to the street. 113 2. Side yard: 10 feet. 114 3. Rear Yard 10 feet. 115 4. If two adjoining sites share parking, setbacks for common side and rear yards may be 116 reduced to zero. 117 D. Parking Structures. Parking structure façades must architecturally complement the building(s) 118 the parking structure serves through the use of exterior materials, architectural elements, or 119 color. Parking structures must include architectural elements that enhance the structure and 120 break up its mass. Examples of specific architectural elements that assist in meeting this 121 requirement include decorative piers and pilasters, banding, reveals, architectural accents, wall 122 plane articulation, decorative artwork, ornamental grillwork, recessed window openings, façade 123 treatment variations, and locating tenant signs on the side of parking ramps. Parking structures 124 must be appropriately screened as required in Section 11.03. 125 Subd. 8. Pedestrian and Off-Street Bicycle Facility Standards. 126 A. Public sidewalks and/or trails must be constructed in conformance with the Comprehensive 127 Guide Plan or the City Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan. Design must conform to the requirements of 128 the City Engineer and the City Parks and Recreation Director. 129 B. An off-street sidewalk or multi-use trail must be provided that connects the front door of any 130 primary building to adjacent public sidewalks, trails, or other pedestrian areas that are either 131 existing or contemplated in an approved City trail plan or the City’s Capital Improvement Plan. 132 C. Bicycle Parking. A proposal for development or redevelopment in the MU district must 133 incorporate the following Pedestrian and Off-Street Bicycle facilities: 134 1. Off-street bicycle parking must be provided at the following ratios for each use classification 135 in a project: 136 a. Office - minimum of 5 spaces, plus 1 space per 15,000 square feet of gross floor 137 area. 138 7 DRAFT March 13, 2023 b. Commercial –Commercial spaces with gross floor area less than 100,000 sq ft, 1 139 space per 10,000 square feet of gross floor area. Commercial spaces greater 140 than 100,001 sq ft in gross floor area, 1 space per 20,000 sq ft. 141 c. Residential - 1 space per 5 dwelling units. 142 2. Required bicycle parking must be located within 50 feet of the primary building 143 entrance(s) except as approved through a shared bicycle plan. Bicycle parking may not 144 obstruct sidewalks when in use. 145 3. Bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground and on a hard surface. Up to 25 146 percent of required bicycle parking may be temporary or seasonal, but all temporary or 147 seasonal bicycle parking must be included within the Site Plan. 148 4. Covered spaces. If twenty (20) or more bicycle spaces are required, then at least fifty 149 (50) percent of the required bicycle spaces must be covered. Coverage may be provided 150 under roof overhangs or awnings, in bicycle lockers, in an indoor room, within adjacent 151 parking structures, or within underground parking structures. 152 5. Shared Bicycle Parking. Shared off-street bicycle parking facilities may collectively 153 provide bicycle parking for more than one structure or use upon the City’s approval of a 154 shared parking plan and agreement. 155 6. Proof of Bicycle Parking. If the applicant demonstrates to the City’s satisfaction that the 156 required bicycle parking is in excess of the actual demand, all of the required bicycle 157 parking need not be constructed prior to the issuance of the initial certificate of 158 occupancy for the building being served. Any spaces not constructed, as shown on the 159 site plan, must be constructed when determined necessary by the City Planner. If 160 outdoors, the area of future parking must be landscaped, which landscaping may not be 161 used to satisfy minimum landscaping requirements. The City Planner will notify the 162 property owner in writing of the need to construct the additional proof of bicycle 163 parking spaces. No more than 50 percent of the required bicycle parking stalls may be 164 placed in proof of bicycle parking. 165 D. Exterior pedestrian furniture must be provided in appropriate locations at a minimum rate of 166 one seat for every ten thousand (10,000) square feet of gross floor area. 167 Subd. 9 Signage. 168 A. Signage in the form of free standing and incidental signs, wall lighting, or other features can be a 169 compelling proponent in the development of a cohesive mixed use project. Signage proposed 170 for any development or redevelopment in the MU zoning district must be included in a Sign 171 Master Plan. Signage must comply with standards outlined in Section 11.70. 172 B. The Sign Master Plan must identify location, size, design, lighting, and other pertinent features 173 of the unified signage proposed for the site. The City Planner will determine the level of review 174 8 DRAFT March 13, 2023 required for the Sign Master Plan in accordance with the Site Plan and Architectural Design 175 Review process outlined in Section 11.03. 176 Subd. 10 Supplemental Analyses or Studies. 177 A. Traffic. All proposed development or redevelopment projects, regardless of size, in the MU 178 district require documentation of the expected traffic impacts of the development. The 179 appropriate scope of the traffic analysis will be determined by the City Engineer based on 180 several factors including the size, type, and location of the development. The required analysis 181 may range from a trip generation memo including daily, a.m. peak, and p.m. peak traffic 182 generation estimates to a traffic impact study including but not limited to turning movement 183 counts, roadway capacity analysis, and infrastructure improvement recommendations. 184 B. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) for Office Uses. All development or 185 redevelopment proposals that include office uses will be reviewed by the Engineering Division 186 for applicable TDM requirements, which may include submittal of a TDM Plan or commitment 187 of the property owner or developer to implement chosen TDM strategies from a City-188 approved checklist. TDM Plan requirements include measures to be implemented, a two-year 189 budget, and an evaluation plan. TDM strategies that must be considered in the TDM plan 190 include, but are not limited to, financial incentives for car poolers, van poolers, and bicyclists, 191 subsidized transit passes, preferential location of carpool/vanpool parking, bicycle racks and 192 storage, access to shower and lockers, and promotion of commuter programs. As a condition 193 of approval of a TDM Plan, a TDM cash escrow, letter of credit with a corporation approved by 194 the City Manager, or other guarantee acceptable to the City Manager equal to one hundred 195 percent (100%) of the cost of implementing the first two (2) years of the TDM Plan will be 196 required. All new residential development or redevelopment are encouraged to consider TDM 197 strategies such as bikeshare and carshare memberships, subsidized transit passes, and an 198 information kiosk onsite. 199 C. Major Center Area. All applications for rezoning or development or redevelopment for 200 property located in the Major Center Area are subject to the standards and findings of the 201 City’s Major Center Area Plan. 202 D. Staff exemption. The City Engineer or City Planner are authorized to exempt or otherwise 203 reduce the requirement for supplemental analyses outlined in Items A-C above if they 204 determine that the scope of the proposed project will not increase traffic, trips, or parking 205 demand in a demonstrable way. 206 207 9 DRAFT March 13, 2023 208 Amendments to other sections 209 Text to be added is underlined, text to be removed is struckthrough. 210 To be added to 11.03 related to Chapter 11 Subd. 2. Definitions 211 Gross Leasable Area means the total floor area within a building that may be rented to tenants excluding 212 common areas and space devoted to the heating and cooling of the building and other utility areas. 213 Use Classification means a group of similar uses that are associated with each other to such an extent 214 that they perform a specific land use function. 215 To be added to Chapter 11.03 Subd 1 (Table): 216 Mixed Use District MU 217 To be added to 11.03 related to Off Street Parking 218 H. Off-street Parking Facilities. “Parking calculation for the TC, TOD, and MU zoning districts can 219 be found in those sections.” 220 Specific parking requirements for the Transit Oriented Development District are located in Section 221 11.26, for the Town Center District in Section 11.27, and for the Mixed-Use District in Section xx. 222 11.03, Subd. 3.I – off-street loading facilities “No loading facility shall be located on a street 223 frontage nor within the required side or rear yard requirements except in the MU, TOD-MU, TOD-224 E, TOD-R, TC-MU, TC-R and TC-C. 225 To be added to 11.03 related to Building Materials 226 11.03, Subd. 3.K.3 – exterior building materials “In Districts N-Com, C-Com, C-Reg, C-Reg-Ser, C-227 Hwy, Ofc, Pub A-C, A-OFC, MU, TC-C, TC-R, TC-MU, and RM-2.5, TOD-R, TOD-E, TOD-MU, and GC a 228 minimum of seventy-five percent, (75%), of each façade of the exterior building finish shall consist 229 of at least three (3) contrasting, yet complementary materials, with at least one (1) color variation 230 therein, materials comparable in grade and quality to the following Class I materials:…” 231 To be added to 11.03 related to Trash and Recycling 232 11.03, Subd. 3.M – trash and recycling “M. Trash and Recycling. Implementation of a trash 233 enclosure plan shall be required prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for a property located 234 in zoning districts RM 2-5, OFC, I-2, I-5, I-Gen, C-Com, N-Com, C-Reg, C-Reg-Ser, C-Hwy, TC, TOD-E, 235 TOD-R, TOD-MU, PUB, GC, MU, A-C and A-OFC. This Section 11.03 Subdivision 3.M is applicable to 236 10 DRAFT March 13, 2023 applicable to all properties which have been issued a building permit for new construction after 237 the effective date of the ordinance. 238 239 To be added to Section 11.03 related to gas station design 240 11.03 2. A. 14: In the A-C, C-COM, C-REG, C-REG-SER, C-HWY, and MU Districts, in the case of a 241 gasoline/convenience store the following criteria shall apply: 242 (a) All buildings and pump canopies should have peaked roofs and relate architecturally in 243 scale, proportion, materials and detail, and color with the building. 244 (b) Pump canopies shall be connected with the primary store structure. Pump canopies shall 245 be located behind the store and oriented away from adjoining residential areas. Canopy 246 ceiling should be textured or have a flat finish. 247 (c) All site walls, screen walls and pump island canopies should be architecturally integrated 248 with the building with similar materials, colors, and detailing. 249 (d) Average horizontal luminance at grade shall not exceed ten foot-candles, with individual 250 lamps not to exceed two hundred fifty (250) watts. The fascias of the canopy should extend at 251 least twelve (12) inches below the lens of the fixture to block the direct view of the light 252 sources and lenses from property lines. Recessed non glare lighting shall be used under the 253 canopy. Average horizontal luminance at grade at the property line shall not exceed 0.5 foot-254 candles. 255 (e) Service areas, storage areas and refuse enclosures shall be screened from public view, 256 adjacent streets and residential areas 257 (f) A landscape buffer shall be required to provide screening from adjacent residential uses. 258 To be added to Section 11.70 5.B. 259 Commercial Districts: N-Com, C-Com, C-Hwy, C-Reg-Ser, C-Reg and MU. 260 261 To be added to Chapter 9, Subd 5, related to Recyclable Waste Collection 262 Subd. 5. Recyclable Waste Collection—OFC, I-2, I-5, I-Gen, C-Com, N-Com, C-Reg, C-Reg-Ser, C-263 Hwy, TC, TOD, and MU. This subdivision is applicable to all properties which have been issued a 264 building permit for new construction after the effective date of the ordinance. Owners, 265 Associations or other management entities for properties located within the OFC, I-2, I-5, I-Gen, C-266 Com, N-Com, C-Reg, C-Reg-Ser, C-Hwy, TC, TOD, and MU zoning districts shall provide to all 267 occupants services for the Collection of Recyclable Waste which accumulates on the premises in 268 accordance with the following provisions: 269 11 DRAFT March 13, 2023 A. Schedule. Collection services must be available on the premises and must be provided on a 270 regularly-scheduled basis. The Owner, Association or management entity may provide the 271 Collection services or may utilize a person licensed pursuant to City Code Section 5.36. 272 B. Recycling Information Required. The Owner, Association or management entity of all properties 273 zoned OFC, I-2, I-5, I-Gen, C-Com, N-Com, C-Reg, C-Reg-Ser, C-Hwy, TC , TOD, and MU shall 274 provide notice to the occupants of each unit which provides information on the availability of 275 Collection services, clearly describes and lists the procedures required to prepare the Recyclable 276 Waste for Collection, and identifies the dates and times of Collection. 277 C. Container Requirements. The Owner, Association or management entity of all properties zoned 278 OFC, I-2, I-5, I-Gen, C-Com, N-Com, C-Reg, C-Reg-Ser, C-Hwy, TC , TOD, and MU shall provide 279 containers for the Collection of Recyclable Waste and shall maintain the containers in a clean and 280 sanitary condition. The containers shall be sufficient in number and size to meet the demands for 281 recycling services created by the owners or tenants. The Owner, Association or management 282 entity shall replace stolen or broken containers and purchase additional containers as needed. 283 Containers shall be placed in a location on the premises which permits access for Collection 284 purposes but which does not obstruct pedestrian or vehicular traffic and must comply with City 285 Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 3.L. 286 D. Transportation and Disposal. Upon Collection Recyclable Wastes shall be delivered to a 287 recyclable material processing center, an end market for sale or reuse, or to an intermediate 288 Collection center for later delivery to a processing center or end market. It is unlawful for any 289 person to transport for disposal or to dispose of Recyclable Waste in a solid waste disposal facility. 290 Recyclable Wastes must be transported in a covered vehicle so that the recyclables do not drop or 291 blow onto any public or private property during transport. 292 293 PROJECT PROFILE Week of March 13, 2023 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING – MARCH 13, 2023 1. CODE AMENDMENT FOR MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT (CA2022-17) by City of Eden Prairie (Jeremy) Amend Zoning Ordinance to create a new Mixed -Use (MU) Zoning District Contact: Jeremy Barnhart, 952-949-8529 Request for: • Approval to amend Chapter 11 of the City Code to add a new zoning district, Mixed Use Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 09/19/22 Notice to Paper Date 02/22/23 Notice to Paper Date Date Complete N/A Resident Notice Date N/A Resident Notice Date N/A 120 Day Deadline N/A Meeting Date 03/13/23 1st Meeting Date Initial DRC Review 1/19/23 Sign Posting Date N/A 2nd Meeting Date 2. DUCK LAKE RD. BUILDING MOVE (2022-20) by Josh Hohn (Sarah) Request to relocate existing garage 75’ to new location Location: 17117 62nd St. W. Contact: Josh Hohn, 612-599-2896 Request for: • Building Moving Application Review to relocate exiting detached garage 75’ to new location. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 01/4/23 Notice to Paper Date 02/22/23 Notice to Paper Date N/A Date Complete 02/14/23 Resident Notice Date 02/24/23 Resident Notice Date N/A 60 Day Deadline 04/15/23 Meeting Date 03/13/23 1st Meeting Date N/A Initial DRC Review 01/5/23 Sign Posting Date N/A 2nd Meeting Date N/A The Project Profile is a list of all active land development application requests filed with the City of Eden Prairie. Projects that are scheduled are listed under the corresponding public meeting date. Projects that have not yet been scheduled for a public meeting are listed under the “In but not Scheduled” Section. Administrative reviews, variances, and telecommunication requests are listed in separate sections at the end of this document. For more information on scheduled projects, visit the City’s Development Project Map. PROJECT PROFILE Week of March 13, 2023 2 3. HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS POOL ADDITION (2022-12) by Monn Architects (Ben) Proposal for pool addition Location: 7740 Flying Cloud Drive Contact: Michael Monn, 612-247-5406 Request for: • Site Plan Review on 2.99 Acres Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 09/07/22 Notice to Paper Date 02/22/23 Notice to Paper Date Date Complete 02/21/23 Resident Notice Date 02/24/23 Resident Notice Date 120 Day Deadline 06/21/23 Meeting Date 03/13/23 1st Meeting Date Initial DRC Review 09/28/22 Sign Posting Date N/A 2nd Meeting Date IN BUT NOT SCHEDULED 1. MENARDS PUD AMENDMENT (2021-09) by Menard, Inc. (Sarah) Proposal for a yard gate expansion and addition of an entrance lane Location: 12600 Plaza Drive Contact: Tyler Edwards, 715-876-2143 Request for: • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 15.72 acres • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 15.72 acres • Site Plan Review on 15.72 acres Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 06/01/21 Notice to Paper Date Notice to Paper Date Date Complete Resident Notice Date Resident Notice Date 120 Day Deadline Meeting Date 1st Meeting Date Initial DRC Review 06/03/21 Sign Posting Date N/A 2nd Meeting Date PROJECT PROFILE Week of March 13, 2023 3 2. PIONEER PRESERVE (2020-09) by Metro Development, LLC (Sarah) Proposal to build 8 townhome units Location: Southwest corner of Pioneer Trail and Hennepin Town Road Contact: Melanie Emery, 651-248-8457 Request for: • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 3.66 acres • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.66 acres • Zoning District Change from Rural to RM on 3.66 acres • Site Plan Review on 3.66 acres • Preliminary Plat of 9 lots on 3.66 acres Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 09/18/20 Notice to Paper Date Notice to Paper Date Date Complete Resident Notice Date Resident Notice Date 120 Day Deadline Meeting Date 1st Meeting Date Initial DRC Review 09/24/20 Sign Posting Date 2nd Meeting Date 3. KIWATCHI LAND DEVELOPMENT (2022-11) by Craig Schmidt (Beth) Proposal for a preliminary plat for a 4-lot single family subdivision Location: 6285 Duck Lake Road, Eden Prairie MN Contact: Craig Schmidt 612-720-8272 Request for: • Zoning change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 2.11 acres • Preliminary Plat – To subdivide one parcel into four lots and three out lots on 2.11 acres. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 08/19/22 Notice to Paper Date Notice to Paper Date Date Complete Resident Notice Date Resident Notice Date 120 Day Deadline Meeting Date 1st Meeting Date Initial DRC Review 08/25/22 Sign Posting Date 2nd Meeting Date PROJECT PROFILE Week of March 13, 2023 4 4. GRACE CHURCH (2022-19) by Visioneering Studios Architecture (Beth) Proposal for a new 2-story youth facility, an addition to the pre-school classroom section, exterior building entrance remodeling and parking lot improvements. Location: 9301 Eden Prairie Rd. Contact: Brian Parker, 714-330-9649, BParker@VisionerringStudios.com Request for: • PUD Concept review on 53.7 acres • PUD Review with waivers on 53.7 acres • Site Plan Review on 53.7 acres. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 12/13/22 Notice to Paper Date Notice to Paper Date Date Complete Resident Notice Date Resident Notice Date N/A 120 Day Deadline Meeting Date 1st Meeting Date Initial DRC Review 02/02/23 Sign Posting Date 2nd Meeting Date 5. BAKER ROAD ASSISTED LIVING (2023-02) by Michael Knisely (Beth) Proposal to renovate the existing 2-story office building into 34 assisted living units and a future 4-story building addition with an additional 82 assisted living and memory care units. Location: 6216 Baker Road Contact: Michael Knisely, 763-591-0996 Request for: • Guide Plan Change from Office to Medium High Density Residential on 3.79 acres • PUD Concept Plan Review on 3.79 acres • PUD District Review with waivers on 3.79 acre • Zoning Change from Office to RM-2.5 on 3.79 acres • Site Plan Review on 3.79 acres Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 02/08/23 Notice to Paper Date Notice to Paper Date Date Complete Resident Notice Date Resident Notice Date 120 Day Deadline Meeting Date 1st Meeting Date Initial DRC Review 02/16/23 Sign Posting Date 2nd Meeting Date PROJECT PROFILE Week of March 13, 2023 5 6. MISTER CAR WASH (2023-023) by ISGI (Jeremy) Proposal for a 5,460 square foot automated drive through car wash with drive aisles, pay stations and self- service vacuum stations. Location: 8340 Crystal View Rd. Contact: Jeanna Kedrowski, 952-426-0699 Request for: • PUD Concept Plan Review on 1.23 acres • PUD District Review with waivers on 1.23 acre • Site Plan Review on 1.23 acres Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 02/27/23 Notice to Paper Date Notice to Paper Date Date Complete Resident Notice Date Resident Notice Date 120 Day Deadline Meeting Date 1st Meeting Date Initial DRC Review 03/02/23 Sign Posting Date 2nd Meeting Date VARIANCES ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW 1. STARKEY PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT (2022-06A) by Anderson CC (Ben) Location Washington Ave. South Contact: Brian Elliott, 612-500-3506 Request for: • Administrative approval of main entrance and parking lot improvements. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 08/12/22 Notice to Paper Date N/A Notice to Paper Date N/A Date Complete Resident Notice Date N/A Resident Notice Date N/A 120 Day Deadline Meeting Date N/A 1st Meeting Date N/A Initial DRC Review 08/18/22 Sign Posting Date N/A 2nd Meeting Date N/A PROJECT PROFILE Week of March 13, 2023 6 2. DUCK LAKE RD. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (2022-08A) by Josh Hohn (Sarah) Location 17117 62nd St. W. Contact: Josh Hohn, 612-599-2896 Request for: • Approval for lot-line adjustment. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 01/04/23 Notice to Paper Date N/A Notice to Paper Date N/A Date Complete 02/14/23 Resident Notice Date N/A Resident Notice Date N/A 120 Day Deadline 06/14/23 Meeting Date N/A 1st Meeting Date N/A Initial DRC Review 01/05/23 Sign Posting Date N/A 2nd Meeting Date N/A TELECOMMUNICATION 1. TELECOMMUNICATIONS (2022-12TM) by Black & Veatch Corporation on behalf of AT & T (Sarah) Location: 9100 Riley Lake Rd. Contact: Kara Hansen, 913-458-2168, hansenk@bv.com Request for: • Adding antennas to an existing telecommunications tower Application Info Planning Commission City Council Initial Date Submitted 05/10/22 Notice to Paper Date N/A Notice to Paper Date N/A Date Complete Resident Notice Date N/A Resident Notice Date N/A 120 Day Deadline Meeting Date N/A 1st Meeting Date N/A Initial DRC Review 05/19/22 Sign Posting Date N/A 2nd Meeting Date N/A z17117 62nd St W Eden Prairie Garage Relocation z North facing from 6245 z Southeast Facing –Garage and 6245 Duck Lake z z 6245 Duck Lake Rd zProfessional Survey Goals •The Goals of the Mixed Use Zoning district include: •Flexibility for differing but compatible uses, including attached Multi-Family •Cohesive, unified development character •Reinvestment and economic vitality in the district Without the loss of existing rights and opportunities for existing businesses. Rezoning will occur at the request of the property owner. Anticipate development in vertical (multiple uses in a single building) or horizontal (multiple uses in separate buildings, on one or more lots). Main differences from existing zoning •Addition of multi-family residential (up to 75 units/ acre) •Parking reduced for retain and shopping centers, additional parking reduction if certain standards are met •Cohesive design within development •Pedestrian mobility, bicycle parking. (codified recent practice) bicycle parking is ½ of TOD and TC requirements •Signage as part of a master plan Highlights •Design standards same as C-Reg and C-Reg Ser, though expectation of cohesive development is articulated •Permissable uses same as C-Reg and C-Reg Ser, except Multifamily residential added •Setbacks, no more restrictive than C-Reg and C-Reg Ser Highlights (cont.) •Parking requirements the same, except for Retail and Shopping center uses, where the minimum requirement was reduced •Parking for all uses may be reduced up to 20% if certain conditions can be met •Adequate business need, no competing peak demands, and a shared parking agreement •Reduction of more than 20% requires a waiver or variance •Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities (1/2 of what is required in TOD/ TC.) Highlights (cont.) •Signage the same as Commercial districts, though a master sign plan is required as part of a zoning application •Supplemental analysis and studies, same as required for other districts, based on use.